Frustrated with the bodged Shapeways website, so I have started to build my own front end for it. Most of the track in on my my new pages. It still then goes to the Shapeways website to order, but at least you can see everything in advance a bit easier, and there are now templates for the track to print off. It has also meant I have identified items not uploaded , or ones with potential problems. I plan to move onto other non track items , but there is less of a rush as they are not too bad on the Shapeways website. Just follow link(using my new standardized logo on my website), from link below.

The loco bodies are (in theory) to scale so should fit 14mm gauge. For the wagons I designed 2 versions, one for 16.5(chassis and bogies stretched), and 14mm gauge(wheels just fit, but axle boxes might need some filing down on inside faces as it was not possible to print thinner plastic).The wagon bodies are the same for both gauges.

Sorry for cluttering up this thread but I couldn't find any more obvious place to post this and I thought a few other people might be interested. Two questions about your paved trackwork (and yes, the web-site is very fine, speaking as a designer):

first, is there any reason why, If I discard the activation arm and know how to put the electrics together, any of the turntables won't actually rotate 360?

second, if I were to go for your 6.5mil stuff, how much of a problem would I have adapting it for code 70 or code 60 rather than code 100?

I'm looking at building a new version of one of my shunting puzzles (LLos LLamos), and the idea of having it fold in half and fit in a jacket pocket kind of appeals, after Pewsey last weekend. And I'll be pretty much house-bound for six weeks or so looking after my wife after surgery, so something new to keep me from going stir crazy might help.

regardsAndy A

Gn15: Gnot so much a scale, more a state of mind
gnine: less is the gnew more
GnTonic - enjoy irresponsibly

Not cluttering up this thread at all. One (main) reason for creating the new web page front end was so I could start to think about other ideas.

Now the turntable, yes it can go round 360 degrees if you want. One reason I have developed what I describe as a 'small turntable'. Will have to double check how much I have made available(again easier to see for me via my website). Secondly sub code 100 rail. The problem(more a limitation) of 3D printed is minimum thicknesses of plastic. This is around about point 8mm, which sounds pretty small, until you look at actual height of rail. Code 100 is 2.5mm high(I assume 1/100th inch), so code 75 is about point 6mm lower. To retain the plastic to hold the rail in place, the amount of rail above is getting pretty close to zero, especially when you include the lumpiness of WSF. Without the 'stone setts' on top the height is reduced by point 5mm, so plain flat track is possible. It is something I have and am now considering. Now code 60 rail has a height of 1.5mm, so that only leaves point 7mm of rail to run on. That might be possible. Not sure how 'finescale' Z gauge wheels are, or what back to backs generally are. Luckily I am only thinking of flat surface for smaller gauges and scales. I have some code 60 rail. The base is obvious much narrower, so would also have to look at that. Code 75 seems to be happy with the width of slot for code 100. It is just the height that in some cases may cause running problems.

One thing I wanted was mixed gauge track, hence standardising on code 100 rail. So much to develop, and it needed some clearly defined project boundaries, otherwise it would have got totally out of control. It nearly did , but the new website has cleared the air a lot. I may not be running it as professionally as I should, but the website actually documents development, so no need for big development plans. Also I prefer to play with ideas and only go with them when they actually work.

Now I am working on something that might suit those wanting to use thinner rail. I have just totally revised my early inserts. check website, so insets include a base and clip around points. This is less than 24 hours old, but last night I designed what I hope might be a flexible insert for flexi track based on same system. Fingers still crossed as I have not had a print yet. This has a direct impact on ability to print something for finer scale track. The inserts for code 100 have enough thickness to be reduced , certainly for code 75. I will be looking at other track as well. What makes this possible is the strength and flexibility of the WSF plastic. It simply would not work for harder more detailed plastics.

I was about to post something about this anyway. It has only been possible because the new website has made it easier to organise. 2 years of playing around and I now am much more confident about what will and what won't work.

One thing, everyone, please don't ask why I can't do this or that point. I am starting to look at other pointwork (Peco) . In some ways easier than the Setrack as the templates are online, and I now know what I need to include. So if anyone asks, I should be able to do something for finer rail, but this time I will be doing it as part of code 100 version development. For the moment I am putting full panel design to one side(although there is still some for for G1 and G gauge to do, but that is code 200 rail).

Covering up the visible part of the sleepers is still an issue. One way might be the ideas Michael Mott has used here. I am experimenting with thin tissue paper.

Covering up the visible part of the sleepers is still an issue. One way might be the ideas Michael Mott has used here. I am experimenting with thin tissue paper.

That would be of interest to me too as I am using your track for GN15 plus Kato plastic based track for g9. Covering the ties is what I want to do. Can you reference Michaels thread on the thin tissue covering?David(Doc)

David (Doc)Fairhope, AL USAAfter extensive recalculation, I have determined that the meaning of life is NOT 42! The secret of life, however is "enjoying the passage of time" (James Taylor)

remembering some user names is the difficult part.I did vaguely remember I had started on my 3D printing then, so it wasn't that long ago. Now I have it marked. I am trying thin paper squeezed between insert and rail, then cut back. For standard track the gap is quite large to fill, but experiments with a code 75 infill suggest very little gap .

I'm using Kato track in N gauge for my G9 so i think I only need thin fill in the middle and none on the turnouts. I got them in trolley type so they have concrete in and around. I am looking forward to the day I can finish this layout and go back to GN15. NGauge is really small.David(Doc)

David (Doc)Fairhope, AL USAAfter extensive recalculation, I have determined that the meaning of life is NOT 42! The secret of life, however is "enjoying the passage of time" (James Taylor)

Having spent every morning in Wales while my wife was showering re-writing the Mutsu Bay project I now see (if I'm reading the site correctly) that you have an RH point in the 6.5 mil range. Is this actually available?

Also, I'm thinking of shimming the bottom of the rail trough. When I recover from the Wales trip - and get the rest of the clothes dry - I'll order some straights and have a go at Salem Street, just as a learning experience.

There is a large range for 6.5mm gauge. It is currently for code 100 rail, but experiments with code 75 rail mean I will be doing versions for code 75 rail. As there is no stone detail(a consideration for future, but originally did 6.5mm for N scale), this should be(?????) a simple case of reducing height of panel by 0.6mm . As long as wheels don't have too big a flanges, then it should be OK. It is not possible to print the plastic thinner, so it might be necessary to file down some of the plastic in the groove holding the rail, otherwise code 100 rail woulds have to be used. Fitting moving point blades on a point to 6.5mm gauge might be a challenge, but I was thinking more tram than railway, with passing loops.

I am at Blackburn exhibition this weekend , so probably no new items till after that. When I get stuck in to designing, it can be a very late night session. Hopefully might get some more ideas and comments whilst at exhibition. I am meant to be exhibiting my WW1 layout( I am although on exhibition info it is down as HOn, but is 1/35 on 16.5mm gauge) but there should just be enough room for some of my 3d printed track.

A pack of the 6.5 mil code 75 arrived this morning. I can attest that it actually works with code 60 rail with a little bodging. Not cheap, but probably cheaper than when I find a Z mechanism small enough to fit under the Nm 'Pop' that I'm building - or at least designing. Good stuff. Even my wife was impressed:).

I was intending to use the pack to build my new sorting puzzle, but now that I see the quality, and since Peco's code sixty comes in 660mm lengths anyway, and since I've long regretted taking the Ria puzzle apart, a 24" Ria that fits above my big computer now looks like a target. If I make any progess, I'll post some pictures.

Andy, keep us posted with progress. Sounds smaller enough to take to exhibitions easily. Must admit I would like to actually build something in 6.5mm gauge, but finding suitably small mechanisms is not that easy. I have the Crochat in HO, so it would need a low cost bogie chassis to power it. Fitting different rails is possible, so I have been told, but someone has told me code 80 rail is a struggle, so code 60 probably needs even more bodging. I prefer to recommend what can be sourced easily and cheaply, which is why I initially designed for code 100 rail. I can normally pick up bundles of used flexi track at exhibitions and owing to a bit of a disaster at our clubrooms we decommissioned a club OO layout which was being built using code 75 track, and it is virtually impossible to get that up without wrecking it, so I now have plenty of code 75 rail. I am only using for testing, as I can not really see any visual advantage of the code 75 rail, especially as it ill not allow me to use my coarser wheeled stock.

Looking closer at the 1/24 scale versions they seem to be made for 19mm track and correctly so. If that is the case no need to remake them for HO tracks. But please make the 1/32 scale versions available in FUD, it's only a setting in Shapeways site.

Apart from the O scale and OO9 versions, most bogies are designed for correct gauge. For the O scale and the OO9, and the HOf , a certain amount of fudging was required.

Bogies now available in 1/32 and 1/35 individually. Also here is a photo of nearly completed Pechot wagon in SM32(1/19th scale) in WSF plastic, which I find is fine enough for war worn wagons.

Wheels are Slaters coarse scale 3ft 1in, 3 hole wagon wheels, as recommended by Wrightscale, as they do a kit in wight metal.They also do a crane, which is something I am considering, but a lot of different ones to choose from.